Reply #336: Dishonest Framing Yields Dishonest Answers

[petgoat]

Your menu is incomplete, and stacked to the advantage of your theory A.

Your theory 2A, though deliberately absurd, is not absolutely impossible
if Van Romero is correct and only a few charges were involved. These
are suicide bombers after all. Somebody in the building's lower floors
could have gone out and planted the explosives after the plane struck.

Your theory 2B brings up the reasonable point that were explosives
officially installed, someone would have talked. According to ChristpherA,
somebody has talked.

But these "impossible" conditions you add (that the explosives were installed
in an hour, or that the explosivces were installed years before and nobody
talked) are not necessary to the CD theory at all.

Explosives could have been installed after midnight without witnesses. And
Scott Forbes witnessed the "power down" condition with armies of technicians
roaming around the building soon before 9/11.

Tall buildings do not fall over. They can't.

Then the leaning tower of Pisa can't lean, an A-380 can't take off, the Queen Mary
can't turn, and a hundred-car freight train can't make a curve.

This building clearly toppled.



Of course it's only a ten story building. So at what point does a building get too big
to topple? Fifty stories? Eighty?


I don't believe you have responded to my point that the holes in the outer walls were of little
consequence because they were balanced by the columns in tension on the other side of the building
(don't forget the hat truss at the top), because the E and W sides were relatively undamaged, and
the bridging effects of the lateral spandrel plates shown here




I don't understand at all your assertion that the stresses of the impact zone were transferred
to the core. You have not responded to my point that since the core was overbuilt by a factor
of three at least, it was fully capable of supporting all the loads of the building.